Armstrong v. Brunsman et al

Filing 63

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 32 Amended Complaint filed by A.D. Armstrong, 20 Amended Complaint filed by A.D. Armstrong, 16 Complaint filed by A.D. Armstrong: that plaintiff's case be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute and that this case be CLOSED. Objections to R&R due by 1/25/2013. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 1/7/13. (Attachments: # 1 Certified Mail Receipt) (jl1)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

A.D. ARMSTRONG,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:12-cv-132

v.

Spiegel, J.
Bowman, M.J.

TIM BRUNSMAN, et al.,
Defendants.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff A.D. Armstrong, an inmate at Lebanon Correctional Institution (“LeCi”)
and proceeding pro se, brings this action against multiple prison officials, alleging that
they violated his First, Fifth, Eighth, Eleventh, and Fourteenth Amendment rights
“[w]hen Defendants had no legitimate governmental interests to destroy Plaintiff’s Holy
Koran.” (Doc. 20). Although Plaintiff was initially granted leave to proceed in forma
pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, (Doc. 9), this Court subsequently granted
Defendants’ motion to revoke Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status. (Doc. 61). Plaintiff’s
status was revoked under the “three strikes” provision of the Prison Litigation Reform
Act, in light of uncontroverted evidence that Plaintiff has repeatedly filed lawsuits that
have been dismissed as frivolous or for failure to state a claim.

See 28 U.S.C.

§1915(g).
In the Order adopting the Recommendation of the undersigned magistrate judge,
the Court revoked Plaintiff’ in forma pauperis status and clearly explained to Plaintiff that
he was permitted to proceed with this case only “if he pays $346.40 within fourteen (14)
-1-

days of the filing of this Order.” The Court further explained that Plaintiff’s “[f]ailure to
make that payment in that timeframe is likely to result in Plaintiff’s case being dismissed
for failure to prosecute.” (Doc. 61 at 3).
Plaintiff has failed to make any payment, and the time for doing so has now
expired.

Accordingly IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT Plaintiff’s case be DISMISSED

WITH PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute, and that this case be CLOSED.

s/ Stephanie K. Bowman
Stephanie K. Bowman
United States Magistrate Judge

-2-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

A.D. ARMSTRONG,

Case No. 1:12-cv-132

Plaintiff,

Spiegel, J.
Bowman, M.J.

v.

TIM BRUNSMAN, Warden, et al.,
Defendants.

NOTICE
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written
objections to this Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS
of the filing date of this R&R. That period may be extended further by the Court on
timely motion by either side for an extension of time. All objections shall specify the
portion(s) of the R&R objected to, and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law
in support of the objections. A party shall respond to an opponent’s objections within
FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy of those objections. Failure to
make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir.
1981).

-3-